The purpose of this essay is to create an argument for a
particular audience concerned with your topic and/or discipline. In order to
write a convincing, valid, and well-reasoned argument, you will need to do
extensive research investigating previous research on the topic. Valid research
must be associated with an ongoing conversation in a discipline and must serve
the purpose of continuing that conversation in a meaningful way. Therefore, it
is important not only to give a synopsis of previous research, but also add
your own analysis to further that which has already been accomplished. This
could include collecting your own set of data or simply drawing a larger
conclusion from various pieces of research. Either way, it is important that your research have a purpose and that you, not the previous research from the
discipline, drive the research paper.
How does
one go about the research process?
Step One: First,
it is necessary to define an area of interest for yourself. You had the
opportunity to take this step when you chose a line of inquiry for the
Rhetorical Analysis Essay. However, try to think of a specific question which
you want to answer within your chosen discipline. This is your research
question. You will turn in a proposal stating your research question, how
you formulated it, and a hypothesis. (due
Sept. 28)
Step Two: The
second step in the research process is to go to the library to find previous
research in your area of interest. In order to become well versed in a line of
inquiry within a field, it is necessary to read at least 10 sources. After
reading various sources, you will probably find it necessary to narrow or in
some way redefine your research question and possibly your hypothesis. You
will turn in a annotated bibliography detailing the information from your
sources. (due Oct. 12)
Step Three: Next,
you will begin to show how you draw your conclusions from the previous
research. You may feel the need to collect your own small sample of data, or
you may be in a position to answer your research question by synthesizing,
analyzing, and making inferences. At this point, you will present some
preliminary findings to the class. (Week
9) You should write an abstract of your research, summarizing your
research question, how you formulated it, and your findings. (due Oct. 14)
Step Four: Now
you are ready to write a draft of your research paper. It is important that you
have a purpose for your argument and that this purpose is clear to your
audience. Your research paper will then be driven by that purpose to persuade
your audience. You will turn in a first draft of you paper and then revise. (First Draft due Oct. 19)
Step Five: Finally,
you should revise and edit extensively, and you are ready to turn in the
final version of your paper. (due
Nov. 4)
Excavating
an African Burial Ground:
Lack of
Funding Could Mean Loss of Information Forever
As children growing up in the
United States, educated through our public schools, we learned about the
institution of slavery, which was an integral part of life in our country for
nearly 300 years. We do not usually question the historical facts we learned
about slavery or ask how we know so much about the history of these people (the
enslaved Africans in America) who left behind so little written record. In the classroom,
archeologists do not receive much credit, but it is largely through their work
and research that we have been able to learn about “America’s diverse ethnic
heritage” (Singleton 155). In the 1960’s, excavations of slave cabins inspired
a new area of research. Today’s field of African-American Archaeology was born
from these first digs, only three decades ago. Archaeologists carefully and
skillfully collect artifacts, which are “tangible material remains and
by-products of behavior” (Singleton 156). Through historical and ethnographic
analysis and interpretation, archeologists are able to put together pieces of
the daily lives and living conditions of the first African-Americans.
One such African-American
archaeological dig, called the African Burial Ground Project, is currently
taking place in New York City. In 1991, the construction crew for a new, $276
million federal office building stumbled across the skeletons of what are now
known to be early African slaves. The United States General Services Administration
(GSA), the government agency that handles the funding and administration of all
federal property, began further exploration of the site. Today we know that
this “plot of land is just a sliver of the 18th century cemetery now
known to lie under five city blocks surrounded by New York’s City Hall, the
U.S. Courthouse, and the State Supreme Court” (Brunius 16). Many people,
including scholars, historians, archaeologists and members of the
African-American community consider the African Burial Ground Project “the
nation’s most significant archaeological find of the century” (Brunius 16).
Usually GSA is able to handle their responsibilities with federal properties,
but they are not doing a good job with this project. Unfortunately, the GSA has
significantly mishandled the African Burial Ground Project. As the overseers of
this project, the GSA is responsible for the project’s insufficient funds and
the under-skilled archaeological team who damaged many artifacts. The multitude
of information that the African Burial Ground holds presents a priceless
opportunity to learn about the lives and conditions of slaves living in the
North, and it is therefore time to fully fund this project.
It was not until recently,
through studying remains found at the African Burial Ground site, that we
discovered a significant African presence in early New York. Virtually all of
these people were enslaved. “It is not generally understood that 40% of the
original Dutch colony and up to 20% of the English colony were enslaved
Africans” (Brunius 16). In 1626, slaves were brought to New York, the city that
had been inhabited two years prior by the Dutch and named New Amsterdam. At one
point in colonial times, New York was guilty of working more slaves than any
other colony with the exception of South Carolina (Staples 14). For two
centuries, until 1827 when slavery was outlawed in New York, these Africans
worked for the Dutch and English clearing the land, laboring on farms, and
loading and emptying ships; essentially, they built the city’s infrastructure
(Satchell 51). Thus we can no longer view the North as free; for many years, it
was a place that subjected Africans to a harsh life that nearly parallels that
of plantation life in the South.
Many slaves worked for New York
inhabitants under poor conditions and faced high death rates, and in turn, a
solution was needed for the disposal of the many deceased slaves. British,
living in New York, implemented the “policy of mortuary apartheid” in 1697. By
this law, dead slaves were to be put to rest in a bleak, 5-6-acre piece of land
on the very outskirts of the city. Early records suggest, that the African
Burial Ground was opened in the 1750’s at what were then the outskirts of the
city (LaFee E-1). The burial ground was closed in 1794 because of quick growth
of the “land-hungry Manhattan,” and soon after, the dead “were shunted aside or
paved over whenever the need arose” (Staples 14). So it was here, at the
African Burial Ground over 200 years ago, that an estimated 20,000 African men,
women and children, slave and free, found their final resting place (Brunius
16).
In 1991, when the construction
crew building the federal office building, discovered bones belonging to
hundreds of slaves, the government assigned the GSA to facilitate further
excavation. Since this time, the project has been subject to numerous
mistreatments by the GSA. When the GSA realized that there were hundreds of
skeletons in the ground, they employed a large force of workers to “excavate
the remains as quickly as possible” (Satchell 51). To the GSA, the
hundreds-year-old cemetery was an expensive and time-consuming obstacle to the
construction of their building (Collison 17). The haste of the excavation set
off black activists, because due to the team’s lack of experience in handling
African-American remains, the artifacts suffered irreversible damage. New
York’s Metropolitan Forensic Anthropology Team was then selected by the GSA to
conduct research on the remains. Michael Blakey, an African American who is the
project’s current director and one of GSA’s most vocal critics, argued that
these people had no experience in African history, culture, or skeletal
biology. To African-Americans, one of the most important aspects of this
project is the information being revealed about their ethnicity; the forensic
team only knew how to conduct a criminal, not a cultural, investigation
(Satchell 52). For the black community,
the burial ground is a tie to their past; it offers hope for a better
understanding of who they are, where they come from, and what their ancestors’
lives were like in 18th and 19th century America.
Not only was the GSA criticized
for their initial treatment of the project, but they also ran into trouble
managing the project funds. Certainly the African Burial Ground is going to be
a very expensive project; it is very involved, and has been called one of the
largest archaeological projects in our country. Once again, the GSA fell
subject to ridicule because the funds it is providing are running out, and they
are not being cooperative in providing further supplement for the completion of
the project research. Blakey, frustrated with the situation, took control and
proposed a $10 million research project (Collison 17). His work was to be
conducted by African-American scientists at Howard University, who would be
experienced and educated in handling African remains, and their focus was to
reveal a vivid understanding of the living conditions of African slaves. It
took demonstrations at the burial site, lobbying by black activists, public
officials and academics, including U.S Representative Gus Savage and N.Y. Mayor
David Dinkins, to convince the GSA to approve Blakey’s proposal (Satchell 52).
The GSA was extremely hesitant to let the research out of their hands, but
finally in 1993 the African Burial Ground Project went under the direction of
Michael Blakey. It was funded by the GSA. With a budget of $15 million, through
spring 2000, allotted to cover three main areas: the research, an
interpretation center, a memorialization effort (New York Beacon 12).
Although Blakey has been
grateful to have the research under his control, working with GSA for the past
six years has been a constant struggle. “They would never let us submit for the
total amount,” stated Blakey, “We’ve had to do the contract on a piece-by-piece
basis. The GSA’s goal is to reduce the costs and the scope of this project”
(Collison 17). Because the funding is in phases, Blakey’s research and his
staff’s paychecks have suffered numerous delays. The most recent dispute
concerns Blakey’s proposal for more funds. The GSA is sticking to the original
agreement in which they agreed to fund the research only through April of 2000
(Ferris 6). There are 370 skeletons yet to be analyzed, and the DNA research has
just barely gotten under way (Collison 16). GSA does not seem willing to give
more support to Blakey’s crew even though there exists an enormous amount of
potential discoveries, made only through a complete study of the African Burial
Ground Project.
Fortunately, public awareness
and community pressures have put the GSA on the spot and forced the agency to
take action. They are making a move to better accommodate the project’s needs,
but the agency is running into some problems. Recently, the GSA asked the
Advisory Council on Historical Preservation for guidance with the project’s
funding situation. The GSA wants to know if they should go beyond the original
contract and give the burial ground project more money. “We’ve been totally
kept out of the loop by the contractors, GSA, and all other parties,” said
Charlene Vaughn with the Historical Preservation Council (Ferris 6). The GSA is
looking for help and making an attempt to support the project better, but
because the agency has been distant for so long, it is going to take much more
of an effort than they seem willing to give. Other people have been “kept out
of the loop” as well. Apparently, the GSA is responsible for circulating a
status report of each component of the project’s progress. This is then supposed
to be available to the public. Ayo Herrington, an involved community member,
said that such a report has not been issued for the past five years (Ferris 6).
As Sherrill Wilson, in charge of handling the interpretation center, stated,
“At some point, the GSA is going to have to come forward and say this is what
we’ve done, this is where we are, this is what we plan to do” (Wilson 6). The
federal agency is showing signs of improvement, but research and the general
progress of the African Burial Ground Project continues to suffer because of
the GSA’s slow action and lack of effort.
Meanwhile,
GSA officials say that the original agreement allotted funding for research on
the remains through April of 2000 (Ferris 6). For Blakey and his research team,
this means their work may be cut short in only a few months. The interpretation
center and memorial are brilliant complements to the excavation, but the
importance and meaning of the Burial Ground lies in the discoveries made
through researching the artifacts. Augustine Holl, an archaeologist with the
University of California at San Diego, said, “human remains dating back some
200 years isn’t very long ago in terms of science, but it represents a
significant portion of African-American history”(LaFee E-1). Given the wealth
of information that has already emerged after just the little work done to
date, it would be a shame to hinder the further progress of the research.
Researchers
have already learned about two primary areas of slaves’ lives: the conditions
enslaved Africans endured in New York, and the African culture they brought
with them. First of all, living conditions for the slaves were far from easy.
Not only was Manhattan a harbor town in the 17th and 18th
centuries, but also a principal gateway to the New World. Although some slaves
were used for domestic labor, most were in charge of working the docks, loading
and emptying ships (Collison 17). The physical demands of this work were
visible to Blakey’s research team through examination of the bones. They
observed enthesopathies on the arms, legs, and shoulders, which are areas on
the end of bones where muscle has been torn away. Essentially enthesopathies
are enlarged muscle attachments. Furthermore, nearly half of the estimated
20,000 Africans buried were children under the age of twelve (Satchell 52). In
Michael Satchell’s article titled “Only Remember Us,” he writes about one of
these children who the research team has been labeled “No. 39.” “He was malnourished and anemic from birth,
and he suffered serious infections throughout his short life. Enlarged anchor
pints on the bones of his arms show his muscles were unusually developed from
heavy lifting. Fractures of his first and second cervical vertebrae—the neck
bones—attest to major trauma from carrying large loads on his head. No. 39, an
African-America child, was killed by slavery” (Satchell 51). Fractures in the
neck were common among adults as well. Researchers say that circular fractures
at the base of the skull sometimes allowed the spine to push up into the
cranial cavity leading to death (Satchell 52). Rickets, curvature of the bones
due to a vitamin D deficiency, is evidence of another illness that slaves
suffered. This disease was observed in the bones of a five-year-old boy.
Malnutrition was common. A jawbone with teeth shows lack of meat and certain
vegetables among one slave’s diet (Gaines B01). In evaluating his research
Blakey said, “It isn’t surprising to find enslaved people worked very hard, but
it is stunning to see lesions that show they have been worked beyond the
margins of physical capacity, especially undernourished children” (Satchell
52). The realities revealed by Blakey’s research clearly show that conditions
faced by black slaves in the north were just as harsh and inhumane as those in
the south.
Research on
the African Burial Ground Project is also crucial to establishing the slaves’
biological and cultural links to ethnic groups in Africa. So far, with the
funds available, DNA analysis of thirty (of over 400) skeletons has been
conducted (Collison 16). Mitochondria DNA (mDNA), the strand of DNA that is
passed down the matrilineal side, is often extractable from bones. Results from
mtDNA analysis suggest many of the slaves were originally from Benin Ghana,
Senegal, and Niger (LaFee E-1). With so many skeletons yet to be studied,
however, this research is far from finished.
There are other methods and clues that confirm
researchers’ belief that the slaves buried at the New York site we African
born. The people, who loved these slaves the most, often family members and
fellow slaves, buried them with care. Many of the bodies were placed in wooden
coffins with coins, buttons, toys, shell, beads, and/or pottery placed
alongside the bodies. Following African custom, some skeletons had teeth that
had been filed to points or contained cosmetic fillings (Staples 14). It
appears that many of these slaves came from different states of Africa but
belonged to the same ethnic group, the Ashanti. This hypothesis is based on
results from cranial measurements and recovery of waist beads buried with many
women. One of the most remarkable discoveries of the project is the
heart-shaped symbol found on the coffin of a 35-year-old man’s coffin. The
heart, formed by a series of nails, has been tied to the Ashanti symbol called
Sankofa. “Sankofa means return and retrieve the past, or look to the past,”
Blakey has noted (LaFee E-1). The symbol shows that the Africans felt it was
important to recognize and know the past. To support this interpretation, Blakey
invited the Ghanaian chief to visit the U.S. The Chief said that not only did
he come to affirm the cultural and spiritual connections of the
African-American slaves to Africa, but he also asked for forgiveness of his
peoples’ past rulers who helped maintain the trans-Atlantic slave trade (Gaines
B01).
These are just some of the ways
research has helped give us a better understanding of the conditions of
salve-life in the north and the slaves’ cultural ties to Africa. We, as a country and society, can
benefit from this information, and this is why it is essential that GSA
continue to fund the project. Michael Blakey spoke about a sad repetition of
history he sees represented in the African Burial Ground Project: “These people
were poorly treated in life 200 years ago and in some ways things haven’t
changed that much. Getting the money necessary to fully understand who they
were, to properly rebury and remember them has been very, very difficult”
(LaFee E-1). The GSA has done a disservice to the project by being inconsistent
in distributing funds, slow to pay employees, and hesitant in coming to
decisions about the levels of funding. Ultimately the GSA’s inconsistency in
disbursing money has made the advancement of the research and further study
extremely difficult, and many people involved in the project fear their work
will ultimately be impossible to conduct without funds. The GSA needs to take proper responsibility
for the African Burial Ground Project and distribute the money. Because GSA is
in charge of federal lands, they need to recognize that they do not have the
money to fully fund the project, but that they need to be leaders and work to
get whatever money is needed. This project has gotten a lot of local and
national attention in the past eight years, so there are many people in the New
York community who are concerned about the project’s future. The GSA should
take advantage of this situation and work with the community to find a way to
come up with adequate funds.
The importance of the African
Burial Ground Project cannot be over emphasized; Warren Barbour, the first
African-American to get a Ph.D. in archaeology, states this nicely: “The
history of the burial ground ends where the history of our country begins. And
it shows us that we had a presence in the New World. That we contributed to the
building of this country. This is not just slave quarters or a plantation site;
it tells us about our heritage” (Brunius 16). Throughout the history of our
country, leaders and large groups of people have made seemingly irreparable
mistakes. The institution of slavery was a sad mistake, but the first step to
healing this wound in our country’s history is a deeper understanding of this
issue and its history. Centuries later, the Ashanti symbol (Sankofa) found on
the African-American man’s coffin, is perhaps an eloquent reminder that we are
still called to, “Look to the past to
inform the future” (Satchell 52).
Brunius,
Harry. “African Burial Ground Under New York Streets.” The Christian Science Monitor 17 June 1999: 16.
Collison,
Michele. “Disrespecting the Dead.” Black
Issues in Higher Education Apr. 1999: 16-17.
Ferris,
Marc. “Neighborhood Report: Lower Manhattan; 8 Years After the Bones, More
Battles.” The New York Times 21 Mar.
1999: Sec. 14, pg. 6.
Gaines,
Patrice. “Bones of Forebears; Howard U. Study Stirs Ghanaian Chiefs to Honor
Ages-Old Link to U.S. Blacks.” The
Washington Post 3 Aug. 1995: B01.
LaFee, Scott.
“Grave Injustice; Archaeologists are Beginning to Unearth the Buried, Tragic
Secrets of America’s First Slaves.” The
San Diego Union-Tribune 15 Sep. 1999: E-1.
“New
Chief of African Burial Ground Project.” The
New York Beacon 16 June 1999: 12.
Satchell,
Michael. “Only Remember Us.” U.S. News
& World Report 28 July 1997: 51-52.
Singleton,
Theresa A. “The Archaeology of Slave Life.” Before
Freedom Came: African-American Life I the Antebellum South. Ed. Edward D.C.
Campbell, Jr. and Kym S. Rice. Charlottesville: The University Press of
Virginia, 1991. 155-175.
Staples,
Brent. “Manhattan’s African Dead.” Editorial. The New York Times 22 May 1995: A14.